Who owns NAMA

Justin Collery

"NAMA has been established on a statutory basis under the control of the NTMA, and has created an SPV to purchase, manage and dispose of the loans, capitalised at €100m with 51% of the equity supplied by the private sector"

If the state only owns half of NAMA, how owns the rest? If NAMA makes a loss, will the state only take half the hit, who takes the rest?

JC

Sand

The banks own the rest. They put up the 51 million (probably lent to them by the state) to put the veneer of a private enterprise on top of NAMA. It's so it doesnt have to appear on the Irish states books as debt.

Enron style accounting tricks. To think people on this forum were praising NAMA for being so clever with regard to this. :rolleyes:

The banks will only lose their stake in NAMA - 51 million. The rest will be suffered by the taxpayer peasants. Welcome to NAMAland.

BornToKill

Sand wrote: »

The banks will only lose their stake in NAMA - 51 million. The rest will be suffered by the taxpayer peasants. Welcome to NAMAland.

NAMA forecasts a profit of €1bn and is already off the mark in realising it.

dunsandin

The state owns some, the rest is owned by a bunch of private SPIV's, a special private investment vehicle to some, a spiv, or profiteer in a situation of adversity, to others. Apt acronym isn't it.

Scarab80

Sand wrote: »

The banks own the rest. They put up the 51 million (probably lent to them by the state) to put the veneer of a private enterprise on top of NAMA. It's so it doesnt have to appear on the Irish states books as debt.

Enron style accounting tricks. To think people on this forum were praising NAMA for being so clever with regard to this. :rolleyes:

The banks will only lose their stake in NAMA - 51 million. The rest will be suffered by the taxpayer peasants. Welcome to NAMAland.

The only thing we know about the investors is that the owners are NOT the banks.

Colonel Sanders

BornToKill wrote: »

NAMA forecasts a profit of €1bn and is already off the mark in realising it.

And many independent observers predict losses in the billions

In any case we have no info (yet) on which property is sold and thus we don't know if

1. €500m is realisable
2. €500m will indeed result in NAMA making a profit on the sales

Sand

@Scarab

The only thing we know about the investors is that the owners are NOT the banks.

Right. :rolleyes:

Do you know many businessmen willing to take a punt on a property loan management company run by the civil service that buys at prices way above market value in the midst of a massive property crash and economic depression?

It is the banks. They might be using a front vehicle, but it is the banks.

@BornToKill

NAMA forecasts a profit of €1bn and is already off the mark in realising it.

Ooooh, well that is reassuring. If NAMA said it, then it must be true.

Let me sumarise the NAMA business plan for you.

1. Buy a lot of property loans, so toxic that if you stand near them youll get cancer, at prices way above market value in the midst of an economic depression.
2. ?????
3. PROFIT!

johnnyskeleton

Sand wrote: »

The banks will only lose their stake in NAMA - 51 million. The rest will be suffered by the taxpayer peasants. Welcome to NAMAland.

Not quite. AFAIK, the government have given a risk guarantee of sorts to the SPV. The dividends paid out by the SPV (paid to the SPV by NAMA) will exceed the original investment. So if NAMA makes a loss, the non government shareholders will have gotten more back than their original investment.

If it makes a profit they get their money back plus a share of that profit.

Heads you win, tails I lose.

johnnyskeleton

dunsandin wrote: »

The state owns some, the rest is owned by a bunch of private SPIV's, a special private investment vehicle to some, a spiv, or profiteer in a situation of adversity, to others. Apt acronym isn't it.

It's actually a SPV - special purpose vehicle.

A spiv is a wideboy, so SPVs are sometimes jokingly called spivs because of the barrow boy traders of the 80s.

Scarab80

Sand wrote: »

@Scarab


Right. :rolleyes:

Do you know many businessmen willing to take a punt on a property loan management company run by the civil service that buys at prices way above market value in the midst of a massive property crash and economic depression?

It is the banks. They might be using a front vehicle, but it is the banks.

Would you ever take off the tinfoil hat.

Brian Lenihan wrote:

The NAMA SPV structure has a subscribed capital of €100m. As explained to the Dail at the time of the legislation, and subsequently agreed with the EU, 49% of this capital was advanced by NAMA and 51% by private investors. Three private investors, namely, Irish Life Investment Managers, New Ireland Assurance and a group of clients of Allied Irish Banks Investment Managers, have each invested €17m in the vehicle. It is important to note that in each case the beneficial owners of the investment are pension funds or other clients of these investment companies and not the parent credit institution.

johnnyskeleton wrote:

Not quite. AFAIK, the government have given a risk guarantee of sorts to the SPV. The dividends paid out by the SPV (paid to the SPV by NAMA) will exceed the original investment. So if NAMA makes a loss, the non government shareholders will have gotten more back than their original investment.

If it makes a profit they get their money back plus a share of that profit.

Heads you win, tails I lose.

Dividends will only be paid out of the SPV if the company is profitable, the dividend - if paid - will be capped at the 10-year government bond rate at the time.

Further from the EU decision on NAMA

3. “If the Master SPV makes a loss in its lifetime or is wound-up, the equity invested in the majority private-sector owned Master SPV and any associated dividends will be lost.”

ei.sdraob

Scarab80 wrote: »

The only thing we know about the investors is that the owners are NOT the banks.

thats a lie and you know it :mad: you even highlighted some of these yourself

NAMA was invested by the very banks who are benefiting from NAMA, you couldn't make it up!

No conflict of interest there at all

* 17% is owned by Irish Life which is part of Permanent TSB
* 17% is owned by New Ireland – which is part of the Bank of Ireland Group
* 17% is owned by “major pension and institutional clients” of AIB Investment Managers

They paid €51 Million for a 51% share in NAMA.

and that answer's OP question

johnnyskeleton

Scarab80 wrote: »

Would you ever take off the tinfoil hat.

Next you'll be saying we don't need our shotguns and tins of beans!

Scarab80 wrote: »

Dividends will only be paid out of the SPV if the company is profitable, the dividend - if paid - will be capped at the 10-year government bond rate at the time.

Further from the EU decision on NAMA

In the preceeding paragraph it says:

The equity investors (NAMA and private investors) will be entitled to receive an annual dividend linked to the performance and profitability (taking account of all direct and indirect costs) of the Master SPV, capped at […].

My understanding is that the part you quote relates to any dividends outstanding when it is wound up. But they are still entitled to receive an annual dividend and, as this is going to run over 10 years. These funds cannot be held or reinvested in the SPV, because if the dividends were to be put back into the SPV, that would push the private investment holding above 51% and the government portion below 49%. It would be similar to what happened when AIB didn't pay their dividend and the government were forced to take a higher stake.

In any event the dividend appears to be linked to performance and profitability, not to the original stake. So it is possible that it could be measured as a percentage of the magaged assets which is a huge figure. Even 1% of that would more than make up for the capital invested.

Scarab80

ei.sdraob wrote: »

thats a lie and you know it :mad: you even highlighted some of these yourself

NAMA was invested by the very banks who are benefiting from NAMA, you couldn't make it up!

No conflict of interest there at all

If you had a pension managed by BOI Asset Managers would your pension be owned by BOI?? Asset managers operate custodian accounts for their clients, they are completely outside the credit banking system.

Why would Irish Life who do not have loans in NAMA be investing in the SPV??

WalterMitty

Could they not list nama shares or bonds or futures that float freely and would be a good indicator of what future outcomes from NAMA will be.

ei.sdraob

Scarab80 wrote: »

If you had a pension managed by BOI Asset Managers would your pension be owned by BOI?? Asset managers operate custodian accounts for their clients, they are completely outside the credit banking system.

Who pays these Bank of Ireland managers salaries? Bank of Ireland :rolleyes:

The whole NAMA operation is designed as already mentioned to pull the wool over everyones and the EUs eyes while the "clever" plan of dumping the bad loans onto the taxpayer is implemented

NAMA is more than half owned by Irish banks, the same banks who are dumping billions of toxic loans onto the taxpayer (why should we accept their ****? oh i forgot they are holding the country ransom), this whole thing makes me sick to the core, private company that fail should be let to fail

Scarab80

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

My understanding is that the part you quote relates to any dividends outstanding when it is wound up. But they are still entitled to receive an annual dividend and, as this is going to run over 10 years. These funds cannot be held or reinvested in the SPV, because if the dividends were to be put back into the SPV, that would push the private investment holding above 51% and the government portion below 49%. It would be similar to what happened when AIB didn't pay their dividend and the government were forced to take a higher stake.

I'm not sure if dividends are to be paid out or are held in the SPV, i would assume that they would be paid out. Even if they were not paid out it does not mean that the dividends would have to be paid as equity, they could sit on the balance sheet as a liability due to the shareholders. Even if the dividends were converted to equity it would not affect the share struture as the equity of the private investors would increase by the same amount as the equity of the state.

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

In any event the dividend appears to be linked to performance and profitability, not to the original stake. So it is possible that it could be measured as a percentage of the magaged assets which is a huge figure. Even 1% of that would more than make up for the capital invested.

How would you define performance? Surely that the cash flow received from assets is greater than that spent on liabilities, i.e. profit. The NAMA SPV is registered as a limited liability company and as such is governed by the relevant Companies Acts which make it illegal to distribute dividends where there are insufficient reserves.

Scarab80

ei.sdraob wrote: »

Who pays these Bank of Ireland managers salaries? Bank of Ireland :rolleyes:

No they are paid by BOI Asset Managers with income derived from management fees charged to the investors whose funds they manage :rolleyes:

ei.sdraob wrote: »

The whole NAMA operation is designed as already mentioned to pool the wool over everyones and the EUs eyes while the "clever" plan of dumping the bad loans onto the taxpayer is implemented

NAMA is more than half owned by Irish banks, the same banks who are dumping billions of toxic loans onto the taxpayer (why should we accept their ****? oh i forgot they are holding the country ransom), this whole thing makes me sick to the core, private company that fail should be let to fail

ei.sdraob

Scarab80 wrote: »

No they are paid by BOI Asset Managers with income derived from management fees charged to the investors whose funds they manage :rolleyes:

Running under the name of a company who put billions into NAMA has nothing to do with it

Scarab80 wrote: »

So now that you are not willing to admit that NAMA is a farce designed to dump billions of toxic assets from private companies/banks (why the hell is BOI and AIB not nationalised after us paying several times than these are worth) and bypass EU rules in the process, you play the conspiracy theory card trying to make me look bad?

Werent you the one claiming here that NAMA will make us billions? a year later is becoming a bigger and bigger farce with even the most pessimistic predictions proven to optimistic as developers dont bother to service their loans.

Scarab80

ei.sdraob wrote: »

Running under the name of a company who put billions into NAMA has nothing to do with it

So why are Irish Life investment managers involved considering they have no loans with NAMA??

ei.sdraob wrote: »

So now that you are not willing to admit that NAMA is a farce designed to dump billions of toxic assets from private companies/banks (why the hell is BOI and AIB not nationalised after us paying several times than these are worth) and bypass EU rules in the process, you play the conspiracy theory card trying to make me look bad?

They are not nationalised because we did not buy common stock. For the same reason that when BOI issue a bond many times in excess of their equity value the bondholders do not own the bank. It comes down to who gets paid first. BOI is currently valued at 3.6bn, that 3.6bn left for the common stock holders after all other creditors, including preference holders have been paid.

The reason I played the conspiracy card was because that is the only reason you could have to believe that the banks are the beneficial owners of the SPV. All we know is that investment in the SPV has been made through 2 investment management companies owned by NAMA banks and 1 owned by a non-NAMA bank and a direct quote from Lenihan saying that the banks are not the owners.

To insist that the banks are the owners in the absence of evidence and in the face of contrary evidence smacks of CT to me.

ei.sdraob wrote: »

Werent you the one claiming here that NAMA will make us billions? a year later is becoming a bigger and bigger farce with even the most pessimistic predictions proven to optimistic as developers dont bother to service their loans.

What has been proven?? NAMA has so far released trading details for 2 days, everything else is just speculation.

By the way I never claimed NAMA would make us billions, just that it was a good way of crystallising risk and getting private investors back into the banks, as we saw with BOI.

Sand

@EI.SDRAOB

Werent you the one claiming here that NAMA will make us billions?

Yes, he was. Amongst others.

@Scarab80

Would you ever take off the tinfoil hat.

Would you ever open your eyes?

BornToKill

Sand wrote: »

Ooooh, well that is reassuring. If NAMA said it, then it must be true.

Let me sumarise the NAMA business plan for you.

1. Buy a lot of property loans, so toxic that if you stand near them youll get cancer, at prices way above market value in the midst of an economic depression.
2. ?????
3. PROFIT!

Thanks but I don't need a summary as I read the full version on release. It's on the NAMA website if you want to take a look yourself, though I get the impression you would in fact be disappointed if NAMA ends up making profits for us.